On the 3rd of September 2021, the NSW Supreme Court sentenced Shane Dowling (me) to 10 months jail for contempt of court and issued an arrest warrant but the Queensland Human Rights Act gives the right to a “fair hearing” to every Queenslander which I say was breached.

It’s a “right” that will be tested in court if I am arrested but the right to a “fair hearing” guaranteed by a Human Rights Act is something every Australian should have which they currently don’t.

Human Rights is an issue that should be on the federal government’s agenda given the continual persecution of whistleblowers David McBride, Richard Boyle, Julian Assange and others.

Australia does not have a Human Rights Act but Queensland and the ACT do which might help David McBride whose matter is being tried in the ACT courts. People living in other states and the NT should be asking why do people living in Queensland and the ACT have more human rights than they do.

I wrote about the arrest warrant in reasonable detail just after it was issued in September 2021 (Click here to read the article) and I published the below video so I won’t write too much more now.

I lived in NSW from 2000 to November 2019 when I moved back to Queensland. The court was aware I lived in Queensland, but they refused numerous applications by me to transfer the matter to Queensland and forced me to represent myself over a video link.

At the time I had spent 10 years writing extensively about corruption in the NSW Supreme Court accusing approximately 20 NSW Supreme Court judges of various crimes, on this website and in 3 books, so it was obvious I was never going to get a fair trial in NSW.

I argue the 10 months jail sentence and arrest warrant put the NSW Government, NSW Supreme Court, Justice Kelly Rees and others in breach of the Queensland Human Rights Act which is something that would be argued in full at any extradition attempt. 

If I was to be extradited the Queensland police would have to arrest me and a Queensland court would have to approve the extradition which I would appeal. I would also argue the Queensland police and Queensland courts would be in breach of the Queensland Human Rights Act.

Given the Queensland Human Rights Act is only a couple of years old any court matter would likely set a precedent and on that basis there would be a high likelihood of the Queensland Attorney-General and/or Human Rights Commissioner intervening at some point. 

Normally when dealing with judicial corruption the only safeguard is an appeal which is heard by 3 mates of the judge who stitched you up so you have very little chance if any unless there is media coverage which only helps sometimes.

But running an argument at an extradition hearing that my human rights under the Queensland Human Rights Act have been breached would put the NSW Government, NSW Supreme Court, Justice Kelly Rees and others on trial for breaching the Queensland Human Rights Act. That is a gauntlet that none of them would ever want to run.

The major reason I have not been arrested I have no doubt is that I am not a threat to anyone and no one in the NSW government wants to sign off on a request to the Queensland Police asking that they arrest me as a matter of urgency.

If I was arrested all the NSW Government and NSW Supreme Courts dirty laundry would spill out in court at the extradition hearing that I would challenge which is another reason I doubt anyone in the NSW Government are keen to have me arrested and attempt to extradite me.

Kerry Stokes’ Seven West Media and the Seven Network

The contempt of court was a private prosecution by the Kerry Stokes controlled Seven West Media and the Seven Network who have stalked me with multiple SLAPP Lawsuits since 2014 for exposing Kerry Stokes’ corruption.

Ironically Stokes’ right-hand man Bruce McWilliam lied to a journalist and said Seven had nothing to do with the court case which is something that would also be raised at any extradition hearing. (Click here to read more)

Queensland Human Rights Act 2019 (Started on the 1st of January 2020)

Some of the key details relevant to court and policing matters are below:

Queensland’s Human Rights Act 2019 protects 23 human rights in law.

The Act protects the rights of everyone in Queensland. You don’t need to be a resident, or have a particular citizenship or visa status.

It requires the Queensland public sector – Queensland Government departments and agencies, local councils, and organisations providing services to the public on behalf of the state government – to act and make decisions which are compatible with the rights it protects. Private businesses, private schools and health services, and the federal government and its agencies (including Centrelink and Medicare) are not obligated to comply with it.

It applies from 1 January 2020 and to acts and decisions made on or after that date. It is not retrospective.

Generally, rights are not absolute – that is, they are allowed to be limited, but only after careful consideration and only in a way that is necessary, justifiable and proportionate.

The Act primarily protects civil and political rights drawn from the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. It also protects two rights drawn from the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (rights to education and health services) and one right drawn from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (property rights). The Act also explicitly protects the cultural rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

Although the Act does not make international law part of our law in Queensland, it does make it clear that, when interpreting human rights, courts can consider international law.

The Act requires each arm of government to act compatibly with these human rights. This means that:

• parliament must consider human rights when proposing and scrutinising new laws. Find out more about the role of Parliament in human rights law.
• courts and tribunals, so far as is possible to do so, must interpret legislation in a way that is compatible with human rights. Find out more about the role of courts and tribunals in human rights law;
• public entities – such as state government departments, local councils, state schools, the police and non-government organisations and businesses performing a public function must act compatibly with human rights. Find out more about the role of public entities. (Click here to read more)

The role of courts and tribunals

Although Queensland courts and tribunals are independent of government, they have important duties under the Human Rights Act 2019.

The Act applies to courts and tribunals when they are performing functions that are relevant to the rights protected under the Act. This includes both the judicial and administrative functions of courts and tribunals.

Judicial functions include the work courts and tribunals do in hearing cases and handing down judgements. Examples of the human rights that will apply to judicial functions include:

• equality before the law;
• fair hearing; and
• rights in criminal proceedings.

Intervention

The Attorney-General and the Queensland Human Rights Commission have the right to intervene in proceedings in courts and tribunals where there is a question of law about the application of the Act or the interpretation of a legislation in the way the Act requires. (Click here to read more)

I thought it was valuable to write about this now as I will write further and do more videos on Australian human rights in the future. It’s fairly disturbing that the ACT and Queensland have human rights protections that other states don’t.

Please use Twitter, Facebook, email and the other buttons below and help promote this article.

Kangaroo Court of Australia is an independent website and is reliant on donations to keep publishing so please click on the Patreon button below and support independent journalism.

If you would like to support via PayPal use the button below or for other donation options click here to go to the Donations page.

Thank you for your support.

For the KCA t-shirt shop click here.